Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court has directed the Medchal-Malkajgiri collector, and the tahsildars of Malkajgiri and Trimulgherry mandals to appear with records and explain the action they had ordered land belonging to members of the Vani Cooperative Housing Society in Malkajgiri.
Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar issued the directions after they had asked HYDRAA to take possession and fence off the land, despite High Court orders restraining the revenue officials from interfering in the layout.
Following the official’s directions, on July 18, HYDRAA demolished the compound walls of the plots, fenced off the layout and erected the sign boards stating that the land belonged to the government.
Some plot owners approached the High Court challenging the HYDRAA action that was taken without issuing notice or giving them chance to submit their contentions, and for considering the subsisting High Court orders.
According to the affidavit before the High Court, the society had developed plots in the land situated in Survey No.s 194/1 and No 211 of Malkajgiri, which has been approved and sanctioned layout as per permission granted by the Secunderabad Cantonment Board vide permit CBR No.2(13) dated March 30, 1990.
The defence estate officer also issued an NOC stating that the land belonging to the society did not involve defence department land. Survey No. 194/1 had been recorded in the revenue records as private patta land from Khasra Pahani till 2014. Thereafter, it disappeared in the pahani for the year 2014-15.
In the pahani for the year 2014-15, 7.02 acres of Survey No. 194/1/1 and 4,3 acres of Survey No. 194/1/2 were classified as ‘khariz khata’ and patta. In the pattadar column, it was mentioned as urban land ceiling and houses. In the possession column, Cantonment Padava houses and plots and houses and plots, respectively, were recorded.
Revenue authorities stated that Survey No.194/1 had subsequently been treated as surplus land under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act and the government had taken possession of the surplus land.
HYDRAA, for its part, submitted that it had acted on a request from the revenue department to protect government land identified as GLR No. 243 and 255, classified as B-2 land. It maintained that the fencing and erection of signboards were protective measures intended to prevent encroachments and that it had not encroached upon any private property.
Justice Shravan Kumar pointed out that the collector, despite being aware of the earlier orders, ought not to have directed HYDRAA to take action in respect of the land in Survey No.194/1 without verifying the status of the pending litigation.
The Judge noted that although the revenue authorities claimed that the land had been declared surplus, no date was furnished as to when the government had actually resumed or taken possession of the land and when the notices were issued to the plot owners.
Moreover, if the ULC proceedings took place in 1976, why had it been recorded as patta land in the revenue records like pahanis till 2014, the court asked.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: deccanchronicle.com
